Monday, October 24, is United Nations Day. In honor of this special international holiday, I’ve scoured the web in search of articles highlighting the UN and a few beautiful recent October moments:
Today the UN General Assembly will give its podium to Richard Falk, the UN Human Rights Council’s expert on Palestine. This is deeply offensive, however, because contrary to what he and his defenders say, Falk has continued—in his official capacity—to use his UN mandate to promote the 9/11 conspiracy theory, questioning Al Qaeda’s responsibility for the attack, and suggesting instead an “inside job” by the U.S. government.
Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier who was kidnapped and held in isolation for five years by Hamas terrorists, was finally released in exchange for over 1000 brutal terrorists, many of whom are guilty of the most barbaric slaughter of Israelis. The young captive arrived in Egypt, gaunt, pale and nervous, but before being released to his nation and family, the Egyptian intermediaries and terrorist captors subjected him to yet more stress, barraging him with questions in a television interview as masked Hamas terrorists stood by. Gilad was obviously uncomfortable, struggling for breath as he must have feared that one wrong answer could undermine the entire deal and land him back with his cruel captors.
Did this concern UN representatives? Unsurprisingly not. The only concern voiced was that some Palestinian terrorists who were released in the prisoner exchange may have been deprived of their rights by not having been given a choice on where to go. Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, made that clear.
“It was with a sense of great relief that we have received news of the agreement to exchange prisoners. We do however have concerns regarding reports that hundreds of Palestinian prisoners from the West Bank may be released to the Gaza Strip or abroad,” Pillay’s spokesman Rupert Colville told Reuters in response to a query. “If in some cases this has been without the free and informed consent of the concerned individuals, this may constitute forced transfer or deportation under international law,” he added. “We are not sure to what extent they consented to this.”
Considering the barbaric crimes for which these terrorists had been incarcerated, their complete lack of repetance, and the Palestinian reception of the prisoners, which include calls for kidnapping “a new Gilad Shalit” and shouts of “Khaybar, Khaybar ya Yahud” (invoked as a reference the ethnic cleansing of Jews by Islamists), the concern of the UN human rights council is truly ludicrous and twisted, raising questions about the council’s true goals and motives. Clearly, there is no concern about the human rights or well-being of Israeli victims and captives. The concern is limited to the terrorists’ rights. The right to recidivism? Ensurance that the terrorists have full freedom to return to their previous comfortable and familiar bases of operation? Ensuring that the terrorists’ ability to attack Israelis remains unimpeded?
More than 30 senior politicians, diplomats, lawyers, scholars and public figures from around the world have signed the San Jose Articles, a document that defends the unborn child and refutes the subversive international campaign that falsely claims that abortion is a human right.
The importance of the Articles was recently underlined when the UN Special Rapporteur on Health, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the UN Secretary General all wrongly stated that a right to abortion exists. It is precisely this approach which has led to the gendercide that has taken the lives of over 100 million girls – aborted because of their sex.
The San Jose Articles, named for the city where they were drafted in Costa Rica in March 2011, were launched this month at the United Nations. Further launches have taken place in legislatures around the world – with Jim Dobbin MP and Fiona Bruce MP, the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the All Party Pro Life Group, joining me at Westminster.
The San Jose Articles begin by proclaiming the scientific fact that human life begins at conception and further explains that no UN treaty mentions abortion or defines reproductive health as including abortion. On the contrary, a number of human rights treaties recognize the humanity of unborn children and the rights and duties of governments to protect them as members of the human family.
Over two-thirds of UN member-states have laws recognizing that unborn children deserve protection. Only 56 countries permit abortion for any reason, and only 22 of these are without restriction.
Thanks to Weasel Zippers for the link!